Pitch
Volume
Duration
Tone
Sonance

Mike, I know what you're saying. Most of the above posts are off-topic not on purpose, but from a lack of comprehension.

If speaking in absolutes, there is absolutely no way to play a note with the omission of any one of these components.(with the exception of sonance, which is probably a big reason it's questionable.)

1- It is physically impossible for there to be sound if it has no pitch. Every sound has a pitch.

2- Same for volume. Every sound has a volume.

3- Every sound must have a duration.

4- Every sound must have a tone, or "timbre".

No sound can exist in any form without each and every one of these components.

Now, that was speaking in absolutes. Now in order to conclude which of these components are most important as it applies to an individual note, we must assume that each of those components are present to some degree.

In the context of music, pitch is going to be the most important component of the 4. Without pitch being exact, the other components don't amount to a hill of beans.
Unless the pitch is controlled there is no way to construct a melody from individual notes, and all else matters not.

Duration, I would argue, is the second most important. Without an exact duration that can vary from note to note, there could be very little musical relevance to the notes.

Next comes Volume. The volume is important for musical purposes, but you can have a musical note at ANY volume. It is less important than Pitch and Duration in a practical utilization. For example:
If you are on stage or in the studio, you must play the note on pitch, as it will be the most notable of mistakes.
You must play the note for the right duration, but you can get away with a note a little shorter or a little longer than you are supposed to play it. It is not as noticeable as variations in pitch.
Volume can be even more forgivable than duration, because it is less noticeable. You have a wide range of volumes at which you can play the same part on your guitar, and it will still sound good. It falls more into the category of preference or taste. Example:
Stevie Ray might have played his guitar solo loud at the huge club last weekend, but this weekend he is playing to a smaller crowd and feels the need to give a more intimate performance. So he plays the same song at a reduced volume, which changes the nature of the song.
Which brings us to Timbre. Say Stevie not only turned his volume down, but he played in a more delicate, sweeter manner, and didn't have as much "bite" as last weekend. That's timbre, and it is even more subjective, and is pretty much a stylistic decision.

As for sonance, it is important in subtle ways. You can play a sax part with a real sax and get breathiness and other little variables, but you can also play the part on a MIDI wind controller and the lack of that breathy quality may not be easily recognised.

Just my take and I'm not a great theorist, but I do like to think about these kinds of things. I like it that we can actually explore these types of topics. It exercises our minds and encourages abstract thinking, which is always good for songwriters.

------------------
Chris

[This message has been edited by Helicon1 (edited 08-19-2004).]

Chris

http://www.soundclick.com/bands/6/chrisgarrettmusic.htm